1. Field of the Invention
Embodiments of the invention generally relate to functional spinal implant assemblies for insertion into an intervertebral space between adjacent vertebrae of a human spine and reconstruction of the posterior elements to provide stability, flexibility, and proper biomechanical motion. More specifically, embodiments relate to dynamic intervertebral devices that allow vertebrae adjacent to the intervertebral devices to have coupled axial rotation and lateral bending. Embodiments also relate to methods of using dynamic interbody devices and dynamic stabilization systems, and to insertion methods for installing dynamic interbody devices and dynamic stabilization systems.
2. Description of Related Art
The human spine is a complex mechanical structure including alternating bony vertebrae and fibrocartilaginous discs that are connected by strong ligaments and supported by musculature that extends from the skull to the pelvis and provides axial support to the body. The intervertebral discs provide mechanical cushion between adjacent vertebral segments of the spinal column and generally include two basic components: the nucleus pulposus and the annulus fibrosis. The intervertebral discs are positioned between two vertebral end plates. The annulus fibrosis forms the perimeter of the disc and is a tough outer ring that binds adjacent vertebrae together. The end plates are made of thin cartilage overlying a thin layer of hard cortical bone that attaches to the spongy, cancellous bone of a vertebra. The vertebrae generally include a vertebral foramen bounded by the anterior vertebral body and the neural arch, which consists of two pedicles that are united posteriorly by the laminae. The spinous and transverse processes protrude from the neural arch. The superior and inferior articular facets lie at the root of the transverse process.
The human spine is a highly flexible structure capable of a high degree of curvature and twist in nearly every direction. However, genetic or developmental irregularities, trauma, chronic stress, and degenerative wear can result in spinal pathologies for which surgical intervention may be necessary. In cases of deterioration, disease, or injury, an intervertebral disc, or a portion of the intervertebral disc, may be removed from the human spine during a discectomy.
After some discectomies, one or more non-dynamic intervertebral devices may be placed in the disc space to fuse or promote fusion of the adjacent vertebrae. During some procedures, fusion may be combined with posterior fixation to address intervertebral disc and/or facet problems. The fusion procedure (e.g., posterior lumbar interbody fusion) and the posterior fixation procedure may be performed using a posterior approach. The posterior fixation and non-dynamic intervertebral devices may cooperate to inhibit motion and promote bone healing. Fusing two vertebrae together results in some loss of motion. Fusing two vertebrae together may also result in the placement of additional stress on one or more adjacent functional spinal units. The additional stress may cause deterioration of an adjacent functional spinal unit that may result in the need for an additional surgical procedure or procedures.
After some discectomies, a dynamic intervertebral device (DID) may be placed in the disc space. The DID may allow for movement of adjacent vertebrae coupled to the DID relative to each other. U.S. Pat. No. 4,863,477 to Monson, which is incorporated herein by reference, discloses a resilient dynamic device intended to replace the resilience of a natural human spinal disc. U.S. Pat. No. 5,192,326 to Bao et al., which is incorporated herein by reference, describes a prosthetic nucleus for replacing just the nucleus portion of a human spinal disc. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0021144 to Malberg et al., which is incorporated herein by reference, describes an expandable spinal implant. Allowing for movement of the vertebrae coupled to the disc prosthesis may promote the distribution of stress that reduces or eliminates the deterioration of adjacent functional spinal units.
An intervertebral device may be positioned between vertebrae using a posterior approach, an anterior approach, a lateral approach, or other type of approach. A challenge of positioning a device between adjacent vertebrae using a posterior approach is that a device large enough to contact the end plates and slightly expand the space must be inserted through a limited space. This challenge is often further heightened by the presence of posterior osteophytes, which may cause “fish mouthing” of the posterior vertebral end plates and result in very limited access to the disc. A further challenge in degenerative disc spaces is the tendency of the disc space to assume a lenticular shape, which may require a larger implant than can be easily introduced without causing trauma to adjacent nerve roots. The size of rigid devices that may safely be introduced into the disc space is thereby limited. During some spinal fusion procedures using a posterior approach, two implants are inserted between the vertebrae. During some posterior procedures, one or both facet joints between the vertebrae may be removed to provide additional room for the insertion of a fusion device. Removal of the facet may also allow for the removal of soft tissue surrounding the facet (for example, the facet capsule) that work to resist posterior distraction.
The anterior approach poses significant challenges as well. Though the surgeon may gain very wide access to the interbody space from the anterior approach, this approach has its own set of complications and limitations. The retroperitoneal approach usually requires the assistance of a surgeon skilled in dealing with the visceral contents and the great vessels. The spine surgeon has extremely limited access to the nerve roots and no ability to access or replace the facet joints. Complications of the anterior approach that are approach specific include retrograde ejaculation, ureteral injury, and great vessel injury. Injury to the great vessels may result in massive blood loss, postoperative venous stasis, limb loss, or death. The anterior approach is more difficult in patients with significant obesity and may be virtually impossible in the face of previous retroperitoneal surgery.
A facet joint or facet joints of a functional spinal unit may be subjected to deterioration, disease or trauma that requires surgical intervention. Disc degeneration is often coupled with facet degeneration, so that disc replacement only may not be sufficient treatment for a large group of patients.
Facet degeneration may be addressed using a posterior approach. Thus a second surgical approach may be required if the disc degeneration is treated using an anterior approach. The need to address facet degeneration has led to the development of facet replacement devices. Some facet replacement devices are shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,419,703 to Fallin et al.; 6,902,580 to Fallin et al.; 6,610,091 to Reiley; 6,811,567 to Reiley; and 6,974,478 to Reiley et al, each of which is incorporated herein by reference. The facet replacement devices may be used in conjunction with anterior disc replacement devices, but the facet replacement devices are not designed to provide a common center of rotation with the anterior disc replacement devices. The use of an anterior disc replacement device that has a fixed center of rotation contrary to the fixed center of rotation of the facet replacement device may restrict or diminish motion and be counterproductive to the intent of the operation.
Despite the difficulties of the anterior approach, the anterior approach does allow for the wide exposure needed to place a large device. In accessing the spine anteriorly, one of the major structural ligaments, the anterior longitudinal ligament, must be completely divided. A large amount of anterior annulus must also be removed along with the entire nucleus. Once these structures have been resected, the vertebral bodies may need to be over distracted to place the device within the disc space and restore disc space height. Failure to adequately tension the posterior annulus and ligaments increases the risk of device failure and/or migration. Yet in the process of placing these devices, the ligaments are overstretched while the devices are forced into the disc space under tension. Over distraction can damage the ligaments and the nerve roots. The anterior disc replacement devices currently available or in clinical trials may be too large to be placed posteriorly, and may require over distraction during insertion to allow the ligaments to hold them in position.
During some spinal stabilization procedures a posterior fixation system may be coupled to the spine. During some procedures, posterior fixation systems may be coupled to each side of the spine. The posterior fixation systems may include elongated members that are coupled to vertebrae by fasteners (e.g., hooks and screws). In some embodiments, one or more transverse connectors may be connected to the posterior fixation systems to join and stabilize the posterior fixation systems.
During some spinal stabilization procedures, dynamic posterior stabilization systems may be used. U.S. Patent Application Nos. 2005/0182409 to Callahan et al.; 2005/0245930 to Timm et al.; and 2006/0009768 to Ritland, each of which is incorporated herein by reference, disclose dynamic posterior stabilization systems.
During some spinal stabilization procedures, a dynamic interbody device or devices may be used in conjunction with one or more dynamic posterior stabilization systems. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/371,188 to Gordon et al., which is incorporated herein by reference, discloses dynamic interbody devices and dynamic posterior stabilization systems that may be used together to stabilize a portion of a spine.
A portion of the load applied to a spine of a patient may apply shear forces to dynamic interbody devices positioned between vertebrae. In some spinal stabilization systems, shear forces applied to the dynamic interbody devices are resisted by rod and pedicle screw constructs. The shear forces may apply large moments to the pedicle screws through the rods that result in undesired loosening of the pedicle screws. In some embodiments, the pedicle screw and rod constructs are relatively massive constructs to accommodate applied shear loads without loosening.
The width of fusion devices or dynamic devices that are installed using a posterior approach may be limited by the available insertion space and/or the need to limit retraction of neural structures exiting the vertebrae being stabilized. Subsidence of the lower vertebra caused by a fusion device or dynamic device inserted using a posterior approach has been noted in some patients. Subsidence may be due to small contact area between the vertebra and the device and/or by limited or no contact of the device over cortical bone surrounding the end plate of the vertebra. The contact surfaces of many fusion devices and/or dynamic interbody devices that are inserted using posterior approaches have substantially the same contact area against the upper vertebra and the lower vertebra being stabilized.